Skip to main content

tv   Book Discussion on A Citizens Guide to Terrorism and Counterterrorism  CSPAN  March 1, 2014 11:00pm-12:01am EST

11:00 pm
can report the facts and let politicians debate them. journalists are not supposed to be advancing one side or the other. >> host: i would hope that's true. thank you very much boston, new york and the incredible rivalry that built america's first subway. >> guest: thank you for having me. >> i think there are some myths out there. people think the maraschino
11:01 pm
cherry is some preserve product and it's really not. it's note different than the pickled cherry and the brine process is no different than the types of sulfate to use in making wine so really i wouldn't call it a healthy product but i would call it something that is a tasty treat. >> what you see here are cherries in various stages of the process. the cherries that come and even though we put them in water they still have brine in the fruit so they will go through an extensive washing to get the brine the sulfur in the calcium salts out of the fruit. the process of making maraschino is basically you're taking that brine fruit and it in a progressively stronger and stronger sugar and color solutions so over the course of that surfing schedule you will see the color intensity picked up as the sugar content picks up at you can see here is some
11:02 pm
fruit that is very early in the process. it's lightly colored. you can see how much darker color it is much further along. again shoot an idea in a normal day you will say -- see yellow paint to deep red and it's that cycle of the infusion and where it sat in the process. christopher harmon is next on booktv. he talks about the obama and administrations to combat terrorism since the killing of osama bin laden. this is about an hour. [applause]
11:03 pm
>> thank you for coming on such a chilly day and i'm delighted to present perhaps 25 or 30 minutes of comments and look forward to interaction with you then on the questions you have. i'm also very glad to see jim phillips here. i've worked on terrorism issues with jim for it must be a quarter-century now and there are very few people in the world who writes with the intelligence and prudence that jim phillips does. here are a couple of reasons why i wanted to write the book so i will start this way. i remember back in 1980 reading some clippings and newspapers. it was in the chicago area and a woman was looking out her window near her home and she saw a van pull up. in that van there proved to be some nine different people.
11:04 pm
they looked rather like an athletics team, the jogging uniforms in the bags but as she looked out her window this lady decided she should be a little nervous about this. there have been robberies in the area by a the saln who were puerto rican separatists and she noticed a few things that were odd to her. first off these athletic bag seemed much heavier than she was used to seeing with athletes and secondly some of the guys were smoking. she decided this wasn't a workout at all and she thought for a minute and then she called the police. in effect she interrupted an armed robbery that was plotted by nine members with two others nearby. there was a cache of weapons and assad off shotgun and all that. they all went to jail, these people although oddly enough at the end of his tenure president clinton pardoned a bunch of them
11:05 pm
one of the policeman who was there at the time said they all felt lucky that day. one of the others, a newspaper reporter reported this happen during a routine traffic stop. both of those accounts are really incorrect. it was really mrs. walter jacobsen and i have been unable to even find her first name, completely obscure case now but she broke an attempted robbery of the greatest importance by hardened terrorists who all went to jail thanks to her intervention. so you know that phrase now. it started in new york as a nationwide push by the department of homeland security that if you see something say something. i like the phrase and i think it captures well the sense that we as citizens have both a duty and opportunity to be citizens in cases that do touch him specific
11:06 pm
security. i like the slogan more than i do some which have more emphasis. for example you'll often see signs around military bases that say if you see anything that looks at all suspicious immediately report to authoritiauthoriti s. i would think it would be better really for the public to think a little bit and to contemplate a little bit past themselves what they are seeing and not jump to conclusions too quickly. i do think via enlarge citizens have some understanding that they are involved in some ways and i look in part to tell the stories of some citizens who have been involved in good ways. in the spirit of mrs. jacobsen for example there was another person who was part of the lackawanna community in new york and no one has ever reported to
11:07 pm
this person is although there's a good look on the case. the persons suspected in watching some of the many men who had come back in mid-2001 from overseas she felt that they were up to some bad things and she wrote and somewhat troubled english to authorities and said they have to look into this half dozen young men who had come back because this person who wrote roads seem to feel that those men were a threat to the community. he or she was absolutely right and the authorities did look into it. those people have not only been abroad to southeast asia most of them were in the camp run by afghanis and osama bin laden and they were there for trade. i found another category besides these persons who act privately and quietly and another sort of
11:08 pm
group that we have among us is those that we have tremendous physical courage and may not be looking for trouble but seem to show the right attitude and response when the alarm bell sounds. if we think back to 9/11 it is astonishing the way those men charged down the aisle of the united airlines flight over pennsylvania. they knew from cell phone traffic would have happened in new york city when they did that and they were sort of minutemen for our day except the analogy fails from concorde and lexington commonalities because they didn't have muskets but they were willing to charge. we think that's pretty unusual and it is especially in the airplane situations for decades. the council from authorities was always the same, stay very calm, stay and involved, don't make
11:09 pm
eye contact, do what they tell you that these people knowing what they did on that day made a different decision and it was very heroic. it wasn't freakish in the sense that since then 2000 in 2009 we have had passengers subdue other terrorist richard reid and farouk abdulmutalab and both of them had been treated with explosive aerial if you are membrane hoped to blow up the planes. my favorite man on the spot was a woman and that is lilly derickson. this does go back a ways but you may remember her a little bit. she was central european. she was an american citizen 40 years old. it was her fate to be the lead stewardess on twa in 47 on that flight. shiite vets had attacked the plan and taken -- plain and taken people hostage.
11:10 pm
they were breaking down the passengers into confusion and submission. lilly derickson was frightened and who wouldn't be but her composure returned and she began thinking about what she could do to moderate this impossible situation. for example it emerged that she spoke german and some of the hijackers did as well. that became the only common language actually that all the parties had. she intervened sometime psychologically, sometimes physically. they once asked her to sing german songs to them believe it or not in the long drama of this hijacking and she did so. very strange. she and the pilot both showed amazing courage in the twa hijacking. it was remarkable. i suppose we all admire this
11:11 pm
kind of thing and we wonder whether we would be up to it ourselves. these people prove themselves up to the level of events and extraordinary persons. the third category i found to look at his more predictable, the tried and true professional, the person who is trained to do the kind of intervention that sometimes happens. it's not very often but they are involved. we saw someone shot at los angeles airport not long ago. not everybody in the business of security private or public is top-of-the-line. some might seem to us as airline passengers a little bit disengage. someone might be very good but otherwise we meet in public life many people involved in security business who proved themselves very capable and rise to the
11:12 pm
moment. maybe it takes you back too far but in 1988 a remarkable occasion in new jersey is one of the things that makes the book for a paragraph or two. a trooper named robert rzepczynski took notice of the driver as they are trained to do and he pulled him over for a violation. he saw through the windows that there were materials in the backseat which he distrusted. quickly a simple traffic stop turned into a rest and the man he caught that day was a man named keiko morey you. he was a member of the japanese red army which trained with libyans and many international terrorist and he was there on his way to new york to hit a navy recruiting station. this was going to be the two-year anniversary of the bombing of libya in 1986. it was only his intervention that saved that recruiting station from being bombed.
11:13 pm
in 1995 you may remember timothy mcveigh came very close to escape over the state line after bombing the oklahoma city holding. he was caught by an oklahoma highway patrolman named charles hanger. hanger noticed that he didn't have copper plates on his vehicle and he noticed it when they were passing like this on a highway at very high-speed. he swung around and he stopped mcveigh. he was a trained patrolman so whether crick way he assessed that a slide bulge within the jacket of mcveigh suggested a pistol and so they had a little talk about that. the terrorists said my sidearm is loaded and the patrolman said so is mine. after a brief standoff the terrorist got into his car and
11:14 pm
dutifully wrote back to the station and then hanger did not stop there. while the man was inside hangar returned to his vehicle because long training taught them that many times the suspect tries to defend themselves. he looked in his own car and sure not be found a little business card and it said paulsen's military supply company. on the back it said tnt at $5 a stick, need more. so that was helpful and no one at the time of course new what mcveigh had just done in oklahoma city. they were only learning about it and they never thought to connect him to it. one other case, the famous millennium period when they country had tremors about what would calm with the year 2000 the customs inspector in washington state found somebody coming over the border.
11:15 pm
her training made her suspect him. he got nervous after too many questions and bolted from his car. diana dean probably saved the los angeles international airport from abe tom that he was intending to deliver. the book also includes a story and it's a long one that has been nicely told in a magazine story about john o'neal. we all look back to wondering about those who before 9/11 connected all the dots. fbi's john o'neal was one that did so. remarkable, well-trained, thoughtful. for years he had leaped that al qaeda was coming back to his city. he knew about 1993. he suspected another attack would come on those buildings. he did everything he could to move the fbi towards recognizing the threat. he did lead a son with other agencies and the white house and overseas guests. john o'neal was kind of a
11:16 pm
cassandra and he really knew was coming and kept warning of it. eventually he got discouraged and he retired in the fbi fbi and then he took a new job. he took a job as head of security at the world trade center in new york city so he turned up for work in august of 2001 and he kept that job only for a few days. he was on the scene when it all happened and he died in the rubble. so that kind of citizen is one reason i wanted to write the book. another one is a very different reason. i wanted to write this short book to talk about the way we do have a grand strategy in our fight against terrorism. i don't think a lot of americans know that or they don't see all the pieces. i tried to lay some of those out to help the citizen reader develop a fuller perspective on what public business has done by
11:17 pm
all parts in this drama. in that respect there are a couple assumptions. the book starts with the idea that terrorism is a very real thing come a definable thing and a bad thing and actually in the academy those are always at the propositions. i used a definition from a think-tank. this is not mine but has guided my scholarship that terrorism is the deliberate and systematic murder, maiming and menacing of the innocents to inspire fear for political ends. the character of the terrorist threat we face is in the book and starts with al qaeda but also broadened enough to bring in many of the other hostile political and religious groups that we see. it's a premise of the book that we are in fact at war with core al qaeda. now we can find quotations from the white house saying that they agree with that but i would
11:18 pm
argue that in the last year there has been some doubt on the question of whether we are at war with core al qaeda. i argue that we are and we ought to be and i think it's a bad thing that it's become an open question which is how long this fight will occur for reasons i will get into. the central part of the book tries to look at our strategy. what are the components of it and how does it work? i suppose the white house and the national security council will always have that central coordinating role in making all the agencies worked together if they can and all the bureaucracies respond if they can. and it's not easy. it's a candid account of the book of how hard it is to do this no matter what party is an officer who was in charge. so you might have for example the commerce department in the business of promoting exports and we would want them to do
11:19 pm
that yet there could be tension with the treasury department which might be eager to put sanctions on a particular business, a particular powerful individual may be a state sponsor of terrorism like iran at a time when it's not convenient with respect to diplomatic initiatives. our intelligence agencies certainly differ legitimately. they can quarrel about assessments and prior days. there's a fine new book called treasury's war by juan zarate who has a lot of experience of a lot of experience in this and he brings up one case in which intelligence is closely watching the whole terror network someplace but at the same time they have to have a meeting with justice because justices eager to wrap these fellows up and make arrests. one of or the other has to stand down. certainly stayed in dod have their differences and those are famous famous. a thing for citizens we don't always see how many overseas personnel we have that are not
11:20 pm
military or cia so for example the drug enforcement agency has a remarkable international network which is very active, very smart people. they go through many of the same fine schools in the states that other experts in security do and the fbi has some locations overseas as well and deploys on an ad hoc basis to a lot of crime scenes. there is some stationed overseas and many who go their overseas in a contingency. even the new york city waste department to go back to new york for a minute has a remarkable intelligence organization that probably was contested initially by folks like asp ei and cia but they felt it the federal government wasn't going to defend them very well after 9/11 they needed to set up there on own defense so they put tentacles out and
11:21 pm
listening devices out and they are trying to to keep the pull some parts of the world which they think are dangerous. the tooth fist of all the appropriate channels but they are trying to watch the world before the world comes again to new york in a way that they don't like. the nfc if they are doing well will moderate these turf problems. the book has several pages on the major elements of our strategy so diplomacy, public diplomacy economic tools, law enforcement, the military. diplomacy is probably a good place to start create we know terrorism is very political and we know it's usually international. diplomacy therefore has some prospects and diplomacy is done well in some cases. in multilateral diplomacy at think most folks regard the irish settlement which took from 1997 onward until 2007 that was
11:22 pm
an impressive product from multilateral to plumb assay involving a lot of the irish and british players but a lot of outsiders including some americans like mr. clinton, like george mitchell and a lot of others from around the world. bilateral also has some successes with respect to the libya problem where we worked with united kingdom on that. but i also in the book draw some cautionary notes because in going to conferences as you do and listening to the discussion and watching the way talking to terrorists has become one of the hottest fields in my business of terrorism i have a lot of reservations about the way in which diplomacy can succeed, just how far it can go. so i'm more reserved in that respect but i look at for example some of the false
11:23 pm
negotiator stories which there are some. one is the famous case where an american was murdered. he sent the gunman in to do the the dirty work and positioned himself vis-à-vis resident government as an intermediary who could step in and be helpful. there was an absolute classic by colonel gadhafi. one of the last cases i find of deliberate export of international terrorism about 99 or 2000. there was a crisis with abu sigh of taking multiple foreign hostages so out of the philippines this group acts. gadhafi steps in and a grandiose way as a mediator and he offers a fantastic amount of money, $20 million is what is referenced by a filipina diplomat who did look on this. this is still the water solve
11:24 pm
the crisis and everything else and it was marvelous. he had helped him before and he has given him $20 million thank you but he emerges as the classic diplomat which was good for the image upas seeking back in 2000. it was highly-skilled so there's a lot to be wary about and diplomacy of course. there is not always an easy payoff. a lot of groups like the ltc tigers went for decades with many attempts at intervention which all failed and they had to be simply crashed. economics, economics is an important tool. you know and we know, every college graduate knows if you are going to do economic sanctions is important to have as many people in the mix as you can and to hold for some patients with some time because sanctions take a long time to work but sometimes they do work.
11:25 pm
i will bet you if you think about it most of you think that sanctions had some role in the resolution of south africa with the apartheid regime. certainly my studies made me believe that libyan behavior was changed by sanctions. it was change some in the 1990s and it was dramatically changed in about 2003 and 2004. some of the people are right here in town that did this. intelligence man steve caplis and robert joseph worked with united kingdom to press the libyan authorities to get them to divest themselves of wmd not only the supplies but the actual machinery. the machinery and this is a prelude to what you are seeing in syria, and the machinery for making that wmd was put on a ship ship and brought united states. it was a wonderful resolution of the long-standing problem with the gadhafi regime and that was
11:26 pm
facilitated by intelligence and diplomats from two different countries. it's an extremely good story. i go then into the questions of the strategy so i need to mention a few of these. mr. bush writes the first national counterterrorism strategy that we have and he actually did two of them. his principles were defeat the terrorists and the organizations, to an item sponsorship sanctuary diminish the underlying conditions that terrorists exploit and defend the u.s. at home. the government did a superb job of that. he got himself a very broad congressional authorization which is now i'm sorry to say being prematurely questioned. he argues in a strategy that terrorists are truly. he's not afraid to say so and in fact he says they are enemies of humanity which is an old term and international law that
11:27 pm
compares them to pirates are people who do genocide. he had a strategy of attacking the core of al qaeda but also what his advisor dave coal killing called desert to skate -- does articulation with the links between the groups are broke and up and i suppose assessing that would require clearances that i certainly don't have. the obama administration testified and surprises many with remarkable continuity in some of the actual practices because rhetorically he suggested it was going to be pretty different but in fact more similarities than differences appear. certainly a strategy published in 2011 has less martial language. certainly there is less of the conviction that this is a war. he does call for help from allies which is prudent. he does say he's going to try to get at the root of terrorism
11:28 pm
which is exceedingly hard to do i wonder how jim phillips would assess getting the roots of terrorism in the middle east? i wonder how anybody with any level of expertise could imagine solving those problems rather than managing our dealing with them. he tries to get at the roots. democracy is a great prophylactic against terrorism. that is a proposition which is by and large true but also has some difficulties. we see many open societies which have wonderfully open political orders but which are ravaged by terrorism. it's not the full answer but it may well be part of a good answer. there is a bit of a paradox there so i'm not sure either mr. bush or mr. obama can tell us exactly how to deal with the roots of terrorism but i suppose we would all love to try. mr. obama said we need to do a lot more with allies and a
11:29 pm
little bit less on the go alone approach. i have no problem with that. our international efforts are exceedingly important. they are at the very heart of trying to counterterrorism. in moral terms he says less about the and terrorism and much more warnings to us about in our own practices. in other words in counterterrorism have we crossed the line in places and ways that are troubling and he's especially worried about the conduct of torture. again i have no problem with that. i think we should all oppose torture. in terms of other things he calls for a quote effective durable framework for ct operations. a great idea but i don't know if we have seen this yet. i don't think we have a durable and legal framework that our citizens understand or even counterterrorism experts understand. i think that seems clear so all
11:30 pm
the fuss about closing guantánamo i would say is related to this failure to have an appropriate legal strategy. i can offer some comments. the short of it is that i think when james cole and eric holder and others were talking about this in the old campaigning days it seemed easy to criticize guantánamo but once in office they found for a fur idea for reasons that they find guantánamo quite useful for managing the legal problem of the detainees that we have. neither criminals or people in uniform do we treat purely through military means. we can talk about that a bit if you would like. the basic point i want to argue and the administrations that soft tone is the question of whether we are at war. there were portably seeing starting with the may 23 speech
11:31 pm
at national defense university suggesting that the war should end, the war will end and nobody of course wants perpetual war. so there's ambiguities in the conversation which right now are simply unhealthy because al qaeda still thinks it's a war. i certainly think we are still at war. there parts of the executive branch and the military that very much think we are war and going back to the question of legal strategy some of the conundrums we have made for ourselves about detention, about surveillance are resolved if you consider we are in fact still in a state of war with al qaeda. some of those problems are quite clear. we have a great deal of rights as a belligerence against the substate organization which we can exercise in that respect. the last thing i want to say is there is a leader of the
11:32 pm
opposition. it's a strange thing that the president almost never mentions ayman al zawahiri but i think he should. the document published by the white house in june of 2011 explicitly says in two places that osama bin laden is the only leader that al qaeda ever had. and since he had just been killed that is an extremely important and interesting statement. it's only about half true. bin laden had a deputy from the very beginning of the 80s through the 90s. ..
11:33 pm
>> his opportunities and his job difficulties of our enormous. he has done well to impose sales shins on iran. i hope we stick with those. he has identified the revolutionary guards. i am glad he has pursued the drone war with the infusion of intelligence is in defense aspects. i approve of that and the
11:34 pm
president is very smart to push on that. other things we're not doing so well a and the book makes a few modest recommendations. we are looking at day long war. what the heritage foundation said it would be many years ago. not perpetual it is not necessary but it is a long war. certainly until the leader of the al qaeda is caused or capture then i suggest we are in the state of war and ought to be. stephen? [applause] >> we have a few minutes. i would ask you to raise your hand. i will recognize and identify yourself grief the thin ask a question. if i don't hear day question
11:35 pm
mark by the end of the second sentence if you blind day presentation we will arrange it. >> i am a law student at american university. with this long war the refer to i would like to get your comment what would you say to those people who have been losing the war over the last 13 years? we will never win the al qaeda thread you have formulated is everywhere around the world. what your comment specifically about losing the war? >> i don't think there is much evidence we're losing the war. the way that i assesses in
11:36 pm
may 2004 with a long-term problem is to think about titus as dissenters of gravity. [inaudible] fell one and a center of gravity is the core capability that l solidary has led with the forger of the al qaeda ended 2001 before the attacks. and all those third operatives and personnel who have been, and are in custody and in afghanistan hundreds involved have been caught many are the most talented and have direct roles the catching of those
11:37 pm
is a victory but the international community is alert to capture those when they come through the territory. so that part is impressive. but the other side is the raising of a new terrorist. this is not about religion necessarily all that is central but look at the faces of the irish republican army, there is always a process of regeneration. i don't know we are losing but we're not making headway. good people right here have talked about public diplomacy for years but we're not showing some new arguments and imagination and determination believe need to make that succeed so we have made very little
11:38 pm
progress. this administration will not do better than the last one on public diplomacy. >> id your strategy area you don't mention the other programs of the capabilities that take a lot of money. you mentioned the cuts of the bush and administration what idiocy of of these non kinetic programs and funding
11:39 pm
levels of? >> thank you. you were careful to say on the skin you had not seen that but on a close reading you will see that and be happy to know there is day section what we can do with strategy and our partners can catch terrorists also. you are right i know how you spend your career at state with the dna with defense intelligence agency, as so many parts of our operating forces many of which are not understood by the public. the five academies around the world are trading academies he will get the wonderful joint combination
11:40 pm
someone from treasury that is an expert on terrorists finance and international perspective and places like bangkok day run all the time. those are very important because they say with bricks and mortar was a long procession of speakers year after year and our allies cannot we work this internationally to create the international network so my last job did europe was with day program that had 1400 graduates from all over the world, professionals of counterterrorism. to make german disinvestments i am optimistic about this.
11:41 pm
>> i with the executive intelligence review and this is a two-part question getting to the roots of terrorism and the overarching question what is your view of following the money? for example, representative walter jones to declassify a the 28 pages of the the 11 commission which is in their review they said review the for in financing for the 9/11 attacks in points to saudi arabia. the second part of the question is your view of
11:42 pm
auditing certain banks like hsbc or others that have been known to take part in the financing of terrorist groups in violation of money laundering laws and anti-terrorism laws. the hsbc case was just the most recent study. >> okay. >> is a good question as it was part i agree with the current federal effort to get at the sources of terrorist financing. that is hard to do. i never say things like money is the lifeblood of terrorism or cutting off the money supply we can strangle terrorism is a gross overstatement and politicians and should never say that like being elected in the mayor's job to say i will end crime and did you come back into years you
11:43 pm
should not believe that. it is important you have to have some money but it does not take much like what happened with the west gate mall attack in kenya recently. something like that could be achieved. with elaborate process or a quick and simple ugly things like one man with a couple of machete outside the army base a couple loved ones back. that is cheap terrorism and will never be the essence but it is part of the grand strategy. sometimes the forensic value is fantastic. with the double bombing day baum to the bar to try stiefel i'll that is where the major baum was waiting.
11:44 pm
the way that was broken was through financial forensics. at some point to the money came to the atm to disperse waiting for your fair share authorities could get to the bottom of the case. usually is not that easy but it was nice the documented. there is a lot of reasons why it is worth it but just don't overblow the payoff it will rarely work as easily as it did. >> as a special former forces officer the first time i went to the special
11:45 pm
operations command coble synchronization conference at the amount of focus they put on the terrorist financing aspects meeting to other operations. it is a and an enormous part of the national effort. i would never discount. day might not plotted out to the general public for there is an effort across the government in conjunction with our allies. >> there have spent four books on that but to the treasury board is to find peace of work. >> talk about public diplomacy that we are not
11:46 pm
doing it so much with those diplomacy efforts working with counterterrorism. >> the opportunities are wide-open. some we explored during the cold war. those of you would know with other information i was the first off in my life to buy solidarity which we added two new funding to the crisis back in the '80s and it was exciting the way that organization came out of nowhere to have been amazing
11:47 pm
effect. that was just as important as the political side. those who have come matt of the soviet union says pierre absolutely ignorant and blinded to is a good defects we were having we did not realize what was created in a world deprived of information but we have mostly forgotten that we have broken down the united states information agency to build substructure. the public diplomacy team seem to have a good budget near 800 million which is half the total and three have a new television station based brewery here in springfield.
11:48 pm
we have a new effort by the last secretary of state. wages is wise but so far in a leveraged attention to technology and we don't know what to say. we are embarrassed we're not sure how to frame the arguments we don't want to attack the edgy hottest because somehow we think we will use the wrong words and alienate muslims. we fail frequently to give air time to identify this beach in the argument of some very fine critics of the terrorist them solace the egyptian to help raise been lodged in others like a
11:49 pm
foundation that quit the defectors are valuable. folks like this we can work with and we don't do that. we have poverty of the imagination on public diplomacy side. >> do you think the i.r.a. going away is a long-term problem? >> good question whether a group ever ends. sometimes they seem to but just changed their name. i had hoped a successful dentition on debt -- rendition head acquire the pkk. i was half wrong.
11:50 pm
we got five years of peace in that theatre which was welcomed the but they've managed after name changes with the irish republican army we have seen an incredible breakthrough when you have mcginnis and adams taking senior posts, he is actually an mp. people like that can allow the of the fight ended five is others you had a ground changer. that is exciting. some are older some are very young and some of our pacifiers. but i don't think the irish case will blow up again. with eta that organization is dying.
11:51 pm
it was founded at the end of the fifties and in a tent with the insurgency was political and terrorist dimensions but right now there are hundreds of those people in jail in spain and france with a rejection of violence is not the way to go. the spanish have compromised to encourage nationalism while rafael -- roughly opposing with the political front. so you have a great success story with the irish and the spanish. it is not balanced it is as much as law enforcement and involves persistence and leadership and to the higher ideals and refusing to let terrorism be an alternative and the leaders in spain and
11:52 pm
old italy did that. there are some good success stories. >> we have one from the group watching on live video. >> the speaker implies we are still at war. if al qaeda is religiously inspired in we still fight them wouldn't we therefore be in a religiously inspired more carried out by military means? >> carried out by terrorism nonmilitary. most states in the world have forces that have guns in your not terrorists because of that but a lot of terrorists may where parts of the uniform that seem they wish to be this -- by the cut defined by i geneva of the four test. it is true al qaeda is
11:53 pm
inspired by religion. of course, we make the obvious distinction between with that is is log in what is at the heart of al qaeda but it is valuable to base the religious roots and one of the best ways is to open the addition of inspired magazine. even after the editors were killed in the drone strike that lays out in clear terms how they do their public diplomacy. they are religiously inspired. we have to remember we fought with the anarchist a century ago.
11:54 pm
we have resisted for years sky is like the kkk and waves that are still with us we attack the communist terrorist groups like the weather been in the '80s the fbi infiltrated the right-wing sealock these guys up with great skill. we have beat many waves that have nothing to do with religion. we don't have an obsession with religion but to al qaeda that is a hostile entity that has attacked us repeatedly. >> eight you for your presentation. in europe and asia and the
11:55 pm
middle east putting on counter ideology with the radicalization programs. we'll let you say in the toolkit those are areas to further explore or we do that quite well as? >> i don't think so. said dutch are way ahead. we've tried in this way there have been many meetings bringing people together how to decide to do it better. you could did germany. it is difficult to change people's ideas and you need to have the right arguments and qualifications. there is nothing quite as powerful as a member of one of those organizations that has quit. in the past with the war's.
11:56 pm
at the turn of the century that ended with the surrender in the mid '50s '50s, in both cases is the commander of the opposition in our custody wrote books and gave a lecture to workers in actually talked about the prospect of the philippines being a part of the americans. was incredible diplomacy that no professor of could have. that is a good example of how we could do better with the radicalization. there is some success of other countries but also some losses. recidivism is a problem in prison and terrorism. you're never absolutely certain there are some very
11:57 pm
good cases they are stunned that was built like from saudi arabia. they want to fight back lake not formally aligned but terrorist groups in day tried to overcome the direct personal threat. to be paramount to of a grand strategy they have much to learn from their partners. there is more that we can learn on that. >> i will exercise the moderators prerogative to ask a last question. lead you can wrap up. i will steal this from your introduction.
11:58 pm
americans are performance oriented. finish this and be done and walk away. will we ever be able to say we have defeated terrorism? . .
11:59 pm
they work and they won and their party held sway in the parliament in algiers for another couple of decades, and there's a lot of other groups would have won, too so this is a pretting threat strategically and also at lower levels, there's too offer often people will want to do that and think it works, and in many respects it has worked. so we have to continue to push become in a moderate and professional way. well informed by art and science, and backed up by will power, because, after all, terrorism is in many respects a
12:00 am
test of our wills. >> well, i think all of you have realized, probably by virtue of you coming to this, that this is an issue that has not gone away. i would love to say that our president, mr. obama, was correct when he said we can't be at war forever. we just have to end this thing. i wish that were the way the world worked, but mr. president, i'm sorry, both sides have to stop in a war, and unfortunately, as chris has discussed today, the other side hasn't decided to stop yet. so that means we need to stay involved as well. i'd ask you to join me in thanking chris for a great presentation. [applause] >> he is going to stay up here to sign any books, anyone who purchased one outside can bring it up and he'd be happy to sign it. thank you very much for being here at heritage with us.


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on